GH2009COM006ib4 508. GH2009COM006ib4 508
Hɛn Mpoano Policy Brief Series
A National Framework for Fisheries
Co-management in Ghana
Policy Brief 4, February 2013
Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island
This publication is available electronically on the Coastal Resources Center’s website at
http://www.crc.uri.edu
For more information on the Integrated Coastal and Fisheries Governance project, contact:
Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett Bay Campus, 220 South
Ferry Road, Narragansett, Rhode Island 02882, USA. Brian Crawford, Director International
Programs at brian@crc.uri.edu; Tel: 401-874-6224; Fax: 401-874-6920.
Citation: Coastal Resources Center. 2013. Hɛn Mpoano Policy Brief No. 4, February 2013.
A National Framework for Fisheries Co-management in Ghana. USAID Integrated Coastal
and Fisheries Governance Program for the Western Region of Ghana. Narragansett, RI:
Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island. 4 pp.
Disclaimer: This publication is made possible by the generous support of the American
people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)/Ghana.
The contents of this report are the responsibility of the Integrated Coastal and Fisheries
Governance (ICFG) Program and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States
Government. Associate Cooperative Agreement No. 641-A-00-09-00036-00 for “Integrated
Coastal and Fisheries Governance (ICFG) Program for the Western Region of Ghana,” under
the Leader with Associates Award No. EPP-A-00-04-00014-00.
T
HIS BRIEF PROPOSES A
CO-MANAGEMENT.
DUAL STRUCTURE FOR ADAPTIVE FISHERIES
BUILDING
UPON THE DISAPPOINTMENTS OF
EARLIER ATTEMPTS AT COMMUNITY BASED FISHERIES MANAGEMENT,
IT RECOGNIZES THE DIFFERENCES INHERENT IN THE MANAGEMENT
OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY PELAGICS WHILE ENCOURAGING
MANAGEMENT UNITS TO
DEVELOP AND
IMPROVE CONDITIONS AT LANDING SITES AND
FISHERIES
LOCAL
IMPLEMENT PLANS THAT
MANAGE ARTISANAL
FOR NON-MIGRATORY SPECIES IN SELECTED
NEAR-SHORE
AREAS.
Marine fisheries have
long
been
a
pillar
of
Ghana ' s
coastal
economy and a primary
source of livelihoods
in
every
shorefront
community. The wealth
of protein provided by fish has for centuries
been critical to the Ghanaian diet. Ghana 's
most important fishery is for the small, highly
migratory pelagics - fish that feed near the
surface (principally sardines, mackerels and
herrings). The second and lesser category of
fish harvested are the demersals, species that
live on, in, or near the bottom. National fisheries
statistics reflect what the fishers already know:
despite massive increases in efforts to catch
fish (more boats, larger nets, finer mesh, and
new technologies such as light fishing), catches
are getting progressively smaller (Box 1 ).
Harvests of small pelagics by the canoe fleet
have decreased by 60% in the last decade.
Since the management of fisheries is concerned
primarily with the management of fishermen,
this is particularly challenging because hundreds
of thousands of fishers from the canoe, semiindustrial, industrial and trawler fleets are
competing for the same fish.
THE URGENT
NEED FOR
MORE
EFFECTIVE
FISHERIES
GOVERNANCE
Traditionally,
Chief
Fishermen
and
Chief
OF FISHERIES Fishmongers
in
each
MANAGEMENT shorefront community
1N GHANA
have been responsible
for
defining
and
enforcing the rules by which fish in their
immediate area are caught and sold.
With
varying degrees of success they regulated the
number of fishing days, the amount of fish
landed and the types of gear used. In 1946 the
colonial government established a Department
of Fisheries with the goal of maximizing catches.
After Independence, the Fisheries Law of 1964
continued to promote the "development" of
THE
E v o L u T 1oN
Ghana 's fisheries by introducing new methods
of fishing and providing technical support
and subsidies.
As overfishing became
increasingly
apparent,
national
fisheries
managers attempted to regulate fishing in
order to sustain this important source of food,
employment and income. Some Chief Fishermen
tried to institute rules restricting some types
of fishing gear, but they were not supported
by the courts and were sidelined.
Today
these traditional authorities remain respected
members of fishing communities and often
assume leadership roles.
In the late 1980s, the movement to decentralize
government gave the District Assemblies
explicit responsibility for the licensing of canoes
and the preparation of by-laws that support the
implementation of national fisheries regulations.
Issue Brief #1 describes the constraints that
have prevented the Districts from acting on
many of the responsibilities delegated to them.
In the mid-90s, externally funded projects
worked with government agencies in forestry,
water and fishery systems to establish comanagement institutions. The largest of these
projects was the Word Bank funded , fisheries
sub-sector capacity building project' initiated
in 1997. This project created 133 Community
Based
Fishery
Management
Committees
(CBFMCs) along the ocean coast. Unfortunately,
these institutions were not effective and little
evidence of this effort remains today.
The result is that enforcement of any
regulation for many decades has been weak
or non-existent and the evidence of severe
overfishing has become ever more visible. The
formulation of fisheries policy and regulations,
monitoring and enforcement have remained
with central authorities and the management
system is top-down. Today Ghana's fisheries
are in crisis. The pelagic stocks could collapse
and this would bring a massive crisis that would
dramatically affect all coastal communities and
the nation as a whole.
Box 1 : The massive decline in the catch of small
pelagics by the canoe fleet since 2000
140
Ghana's
experience
THE ENABLING
CONDITIONS FOR since the colonial era
underscores what is
SUCCESSFUL
learned from
IMPLEMENTATION being
the management of
OF FISHERY
fisheries
in
other
REFORMS
regions of the world.
In cases where there are many fishermen, many
species and multiple modes of fishing, top-down
management does not work. Those who are most
affected by fisheries management rules must
participate in shaping and adjusting the rules.
Responsibility and authority must be distributed.
International experience confirms that solutions
built around principals of adaptive co-management,
while difficult to design and implement, are most
likely to be effective and sustainable.
CO-MANAGEMENT, or collaborative management,
requires that key stakeholders, most notably the
resource users themselves, have significant roles
and responsibilities in the management process.
In such systems, local management units well
connected with fishing, marketing and processing
operations, and well aware of social conditions in
fishing communities, are , nested ' within higher level
governance institutions at the district, region and
national scales.
ADAPTIVE CO-MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS are designed
to encourage , learning-by-doing ' and feedback loops
that promote experimentation. In adaptive systems
the rules governing a fishery can be modified to
quickly respond to new information or changing
operating environments.
Regular re-assessments
based on specified indicators serve to assess
performance and progress towards objectives.
LEARNING FROM EXPERIENCE. The initial failure in
fisheries co-management in Ghana must not be
repeated but rather be seen as the source of a
number of valuable lessons. The first, and most
significant, is that co-management requires a
legally binding mandate that specifies the roles and
the authorities that can be assumed by local comanagement authorities. Currently, such a mandate
is not provided for in Ghana 's legislation. A second
lesson, confirmed by experience worldwide, is that
fisheries management at the community level can
only be effective in small and readily definable
areas over which the community can regulate how
fish and shellfish are harvested and who does the
harvesting. Another crucial lesson is that comanagement requires sustained financing in addition
to the active support and engagement of the
national fisheries authority. Other conclusions, all
of which are confirmed by international experience,
are as follows:
120
g
100
8
rl
ｾ
＠
80
u
"'
60
:I
I :
I :
:J!o ｾ＠
!0 &)0,
"'
A National Framework for Fisheries
Co-management in Ghana
Policy Brief 4, February 2013
Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island
This publication is available electronically on the Coastal Resources Center’s website at
http://www.crc.uri.edu
For more information on the Integrated Coastal and Fisheries Governance project, contact:
Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett Bay Campus, 220 South
Ferry Road, Narragansett, Rhode Island 02882, USA. Brian Crawford, Director International
Programs at brian@crc.uri.edu; Tel: 401-874-6224; Fax: 401-874-6920.
Citation: Coastal Resources Center. 2013. Hɛn Mpoano Policy Brief No. 4, February 2013.
A National Framework for Fisheries Co-management in Ghana. USAID Integrated Coastal
and Fisheries Governance Program for the Western Region of Ghana. Narragansett, RI:
Coastal Resources Center, University of Rhode Island. 4 pp.
Disclaimer: This publication is made possible by the generous support of the American
people through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID)/Ghana.
The contents of this report are the responsibility of the Integrated Coastal and Fisheries
Governance (ICFG) Program and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States
Government. Associate Cooperative Agreement No. 641-A-00-09-00036-00 for “Integrated
Coastal and Fisheries Governance (ICFG) Program for the Western Region of Ghana,” under
the Leader with Associates Award No. EPP-A-00-04-00014-00.
T
HIS BRIEF PROPOSES A
CO-MANAGEMENT.
DUAL STRUCTURE FOR ADAPTIVE FISHERIES
BUILDING
UPON THE DISAPPOINTMENTS OF
EARLIER ATTEMPTS AT COMMUNITY BASED FISHERIES MANAGEMENT,
IT RECOGNIZES THE DIFFERENCES INHERENT IN THE MANAGEMENT
OF HIGHLY MIGRATORY PELAGICS WHILE ENCOURAGING
MANAGEMENT UNITS TO
DEVELOP AND
IMPROVE CONDITIONS AT LANDING SITES AND
FISHERIES
LOCAL
IMPLEMENT PLANS THAT
MANAGE ARTISANAL
FOR NON-MIGRATORY SPECIES IN SELECTED
NEAR-SHORE
AREAS.
Marine fisheries have
long
been
a
pillar
of
Ghana ' s
coastal
economy and a primary
source of livelihoods
in
every
shorefront
community. The wealth
of protein provided by fish has for centuries
been critical to the Ghanaian diet. Ghana 's
most important fishery is for the small, highly
migratory pelagics - fish that feed near the
surface (principally sardines, mackerels and
herrings). The second and lesser category of
fish harvested are the demersals, species that
live on, in, or near the bottom. National fisheries
statistics reflect what the fishers already know:
despite massive increases in efforts to catch
fish (more boats, larger nets, finer mesh, and
new technologies such as light fishing), catches
are getting progressively smaller (Box 1 ).
Harvests of small pelagics by the canoe fleet
have decreased by 60% in the last decade.
Since the management of fisheries is concerned
primarily with the management of fishermen,
this is particularly challenging because hundreds
of thousands of fishers from the canoe, semiindustrial, industrial and trawler fleets are
competing for the same fish.
THE URGENT
NEED FOR
MORE
EFFECTIVE
FISHERIES
GOVERNANCE
Traditionally,
Chief
Fishermen
and
Chief
OF FISHERIES Fishmongers
in
each
MANAGEMENT shorefront community
1N GHANA
have been responsible
for
defining
and
enforcing the rules by which fish in their
immediate area are caught and sold.
With
varying degrees of success they regulated the
number of fishing days, the amount of fish
landed and the types of gear used. In 1946 the
colonial government established a Department
of Fisheries with the goal of maximizing catches.
After Independence, the Fisheries Law of 1964
continued to promote the "development" of
THE
E v o L u T 1oN
Ghana 's fisheries by introducing new methods
of fishing and providing technical support
and subsidies.
As overfishing became
increasingly
apparent,
national
fisheries
managers attempted to regulate fishing in
order to sustain this important source of food,
employment and income. Some Chief Fishermen
tried to institute rules restricting some types
of fishing gear, but they were not supported
by the courts and were sidelined.
Today
these traditional authorities remain respected
members of fishing communities and often
assume leadership roles.
In the late 1980s, the movement to decentralize
government gave the District Assemblies
explicit responsibility for the licensing of canoes
and the preparation of by-laws that support the
implementation of national fisheries regulations.
Issue Brief #1 describes the constraints that
have prevented the Districts from acting on
many of the responsibilities delegated to them.
In the mid-90s, externally funded projects
worked with government agencies in forestry,
water and fishery systems to establish comanagement institutions. The largest of these
projects was the Word Bank funded , fisheries
sub-sector capacity building project' initiated
in 1997. This project created 133 Community
Based
Fishery
Management
Committees
(CBFMCs) along the ocean coast. Unfortunately,
these institutions were not effective and little
evidence of this effort remains today.
The result is that enforcement of any
regulation for many decades has been weak
or non-existent and the evidence of severe
overfishing has become ever more visible. The
formulation of fisheries policy and regulations,
monitoring and enforcement have remained
with central authorities and the management
system is top-down. Today Ghana's fisheries
are in crisis. The pelagic stocks could collapse
and this would bring a massive crisis that would
dramatically affect all coastal communities and
the nation as a whole.
Box 1 : The massive decline in the catch of small
pelagics by the canoe fleet since 2000
140
Ghana's
experience
THE ENABLING
CONDITIONS FOR since the colonial era
underscores what is
SUCCESSFUL
learned from
IMPLEMENTATION being
the management of
OF FISHERY
fisheries
in
other
REFORMS
regions of the world.
In cases where there are many fishermen, many
species and multiple modes of fishing, top-down
management does not work. Those who are most
affected by fisheries management rules must
participate in shaping and adjusting the rules.
Responsibility and authority must be distributed.
International experience confirms that solutions
built around principals of adaptive co-management,
while difficult to design and implement, are most
likely to be effective and sustainable.
CO-MANAGEMENT, or collaborative management,
requires that key stakeholders, most notably the
resource users themselves, have significant roles
and responsibilities in the management process.
In such systems, local management units well
connected with fishing, marketing and processing
operations, and well aware of social conditions in
fishing communities, are , nested ' within higher level
governance institutions at the district, region and
national scales.
ADAPTIVE CO-MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS are designed
to encourage , learning-by-doing ' and feedback loops
that promote experimentation. In adaptive systems
the rules governing a fishery can be modified to
quickly respond to new information or changing
operating environments.
Regular re-assessments
based on specified indicators serve to assess
performance and progress towards objectives.
LEARNING FROM EXPERIENCE. The initial failure in
fisheries co-management in Ghana must not be
repeated but rather be seen as the source of a
number of valuable lessons. The first, and most
significant, is that co-management requires a
legally binding mandate that specifies the roles and
the authorities that can be assumed by local comanagement authorities. Currently, such a mandate
is not provided for in Ghana 's legislation. A second
lesson, confirmed by experience worldwide, is that
fisheries management at the community level can
only be effective in small and readily definable
areas over which the community can regulate how
fish and shellfish are harvested and who does the
harvesting. Another crucial lesson is that comanagement requires sustained financing in addition
to the active support and engagement of the
national fisheries authority. Other conclusions, all
of which are confirmed by international experience,
are as follows:
120
g
100
8
rl
ｾ
＠
80
u
"'
60
:I
I :
I :
:J!o ｾ＠
!0 &)0,
"'